No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Problems in Alcoholic Production and Controls in Early Nineteenth Century Ireland
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
Extract
From the time of Henry Grattan's pronouncement of 1791 that ‘the drinking of spirits’ had become ‘a great national evil’ to the conclusion of the Poor Law Report of 1837 that an Irishman could get ‘dead drunk for two pence', the problems of alcoholic production, consumption and controls plagued the Irish Government. In a country whose food supplies were often as precarious as its revenues, the brewing of beer and the distilling of spirits were enterprises as controversial as they were profitable. These industries, newly adapted to the large-scale production of the late eighteenth century, underwent rapid expansion during the first years of the Union despite restrictive taxation, periodic measures of prohibition and the persistent harping of temperance leaders. During this period Ireland became an exporter rather than an importer of alcoholic beverages and witnessed the development of a considerable number of licensed breweries and distilleries throughout the country.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1973
References
1 For general information on the subject, see O'Brien, G., The Economic History of Ireland from the Union to the Famine (London, 1921);Google ScholarMaxwell, O., Dublin under the Georges 1714–1830 (London, 1937);Google ScholarMorewood, S., A Philosophical and Statistical History of Inebriating Liquors (Dublin, 1858);Google ScholarLynch, P. and Vaizey, J., Guinness's Brewery in the Irish Economy, 1759–1876 (Cambridge, 1960).Google Scholar
2 As quoted from a contemporary report of 1809 in O'Brien, G., op. cit. p. 343.Google Scholar
3 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. II, col. 8i, 27 Apr. 1808; William Gregory, the Permanent Under-Secretary for Ireland, once wrote to Robert Peel, describing Newport: ‘Thank God [he] has but few followers. Nothing but bile comes from him and yet he never gets rid of it.’ Add. MSS 40195, fo. 274, 27 Mar. 1813.
4 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. XXII, debates of 8 Apr. 1812 and 13 May 1812.
5 Add. MSS 40280, fo. 31, Peel to Sidmouth, 14 Sept. 1812.
6 Add. MSS 40280, fo. 30, Peel to Liverpool, 14 Sept. 1812.
7 Add. MSS 40182, fo. 9, Sidmouth to Peel, 23 Sept. 1812.
8 Add. MSS 40280, fo. 101, Peel to Fitzgerald, 5 Dec. 1812.
9 Add. MSS 40282, paraphrased from a letter of Peel's to Gregory, fo. 66, 10 Apr. 1813.
10 Add. MSS 40285, fo. 146, Peel to Sidmouth, 21 Aug. 1813; see also Add. MSS 40182, fo. 60, Sidmouth to Peel, 10 Sept. 1813.
11 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. XIX, debate of 28 Feb. 1811.
12 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. XIII, col. 759, 21 Mar. 1809.
13 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. XXVI, debate of 20 May 1813. Much as the government attempted to relate Irish tax potential with current needs, it seldom achieved its aim. In one inflated estimate, the inept Chancellor of the English Exchequer, Nicholas Vansittart, informed the prime minister that Ireland alone would produce §16 millions in 1816, whereas Vesey Fitzgerald fixed the return at four millions. See Add. MSS 40290, fo. no, Peel to Whitworth, 29 Feb. 1816; and also Add. MSS 40283, fo. 109, Peel tot Gregory, 10 June 1813.
14 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. xxv, col. 836, 5 Mar. 1817.
15 Wakefield, Edward, An Account of Ireland, Statistical and Political (London, 1812),Google Scholar quoted in O'Brien, G., op. cit. p. 349.Google Scholar
16 O'Brien, G., op. cit. p. 349.Google Scholar
17 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. XIV, debate of 15 Mar. 1809.
18 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. XXXI, col. 249, 11 May 1815.
19 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. VII, col. 254, 19 May 1806.
20 Kiernan, T. J., The History of the Financial Administration of Ireland to 1817 (London, 1930), p. 322.Google Scholar
21 Add. MSS 40199, fo. 247, Gregory to Peel, 14 Nov. 1814. In a subsequent letter, Gregory wrote: ‘I know little of him to feel any personal dislike, but I am fully aware of his general unpopularity.’ Add. MSS 40199, fo. 268, 21 Nov. 1814.
22 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. XIV, col. 576, 15 May 1809.
23 O'Brien, G., op. cit. p. 349.Google Scholar
24 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. XXVI, col. 703, 17 June 1813; also Add. MSS 40295, fo. 87, Peel to Sir E. B. Baker, 13 May 1818.
25 Add. MSS 40290, fo. 163, Peel to Sidmouth, 21 Mar. 1816; Add. MSS 40290, fo. 195, Peel to Fitzgerald, 6 Apr. 1816.
26 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. XXVI, col. 702, 17 June 1813.
27 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. XIV, col. 577, 15 May 1809. One report was cited that spoke of, §80,000 in fines being levied and only, §600 being collected.
28 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. XXVI, col. 701, 17 June 1813.
29 Ibid. col. 703. Gregory had served as a Commissioner of the Excise.
30 Add. MSS 40283, fo. 109, Peel to Gregory, 10 June 1813.
31 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. XXVI, col. 703, 17 June 1813.
32 Add. MSS 40283, fo. 153, Peel to Gregory, 23 June 1813.
33 Add. MSS 40291, fo. 198, Peel to Fitzgerald, 16 Oct. 1816.
34 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. XXXV, col. 886, 5 Mar. 1817.
35 Add. MSS 40291, fo. 190, Peel to Fitzgerald, 10 Oct. 1816.
36 As quoted in The Times, 16 Oct. 1816, p. 3.
37 The Times, 30 Nov. 1816, p. 3.
38 Add. MSS 40291, fo. 193, Peel to Fitzgerald, 14 Oct. 1816.
39 Add. MSS 40182, fo. 230, Sidmouth to Peel, 14 Oct. 1816.
40 Add. MSS 40291, fo. 201, Peel to Desart, 19 Oct. 1816.
41 Add. MSS 40292, fo. 156, Peel to Gregory, 28 Feb. 1817; Add. MSS 40292, fo. 162, Peel to Gregory, 6 Mar. 1817; Add. MSS 40292, fo. 174, Peel to Whitworth, 8 Mar. 1817.
42 Hansard, Ist ser., vol. XXXV, col. 886, 5 Mar. 1817.
43 Add. MSS 40292, fo. 174, Peel to Whitworth, 8 Mar. 1817.